{"id":257097,"date":"2008-06-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-06-19T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008"},"modified":"2014-10-10T15:35:27","modified_gmt":"2014-10-10T10:05:27","slug":"dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008","title":{"rendered":"Dhanabhagyam Ammal vs The Special Grade Secretary on 20 June, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Dhanabhagyam Ammal vs The Special Grade Secretary on 20 June, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCRP.No. 669 of 2004()\n\n\n1. DHANABHAGYAM AMMAL,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE SPECIAL GRADE SECRETARY\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE PRESIDENT, PUDUPPARIYARAM GRAMA\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.N.KRISHNANKUTTY ACHAN(SR.)\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID\n\n Dated :20\/06\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n                         HARUN-UL-RASHID, J.\n                   --------------------------------------------\n                         C.R.P. NO. 669 OF 2004\n                   --------------------------------------------\n\n                   Dated this the 20th day of June, 2008\n\n\n                                  O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
      The plaintiff in O.S. No.302 of 1996 on the file of the Additional<\/p>\n
Munsiff’s Court, Palakkad is the revision petitioner.           The revision is<\/p>\n
directed against the judgment dated 16.1.2004 in C.M.A. No.27 of 1998<\/p>\n
which arose out of the order dated 31.3.1998 in I.A. No.1749 of 1996 in<\/p>\n
the above suit.\n<\/p>\n
\n
      2. By order dated 22.6.1996 in I.A. No.1498 of 1996, the Munsiff’s<\/p>\n
Court directed the defendants in the suit not to implement the order of<\/p>\n
cancellation of Ext.A12 cinema licence till the disposal of the suit. The<\/p>\n
plaintiff complained that the defendants violated the said order           and<\/p>\n
thereby committed contempt of court.           The trial court by order dated<\/p>\n
31.3.1998 in I.A. No.1749 of 1996 directed                     detention of the<\/p>\n
defendants\/respondents herein in civil prison for three months under Order<\/p>\n
XXXIX Rule 2A C.P.C. The said order was reversed in appeal and the<\/p>\n
appellate court set aside the order.       Aggrieved by the judgment of the<\/p>\n
lower appellate court, the plaintiff has come up in revision.<\/p>\n
C.R.P. NO.669\/2004                      2<\/span><\/p>\n
       3. It is the case of the plaintiff that inspite of the order of the trial<\/p>\n
court not to implement the order of cancellation of the licence, the<\/p>\n
Panchayat did not allow the plaintiff to conduct the cinema show.             It<\/p>\n
withheld the DCR and tickets and refused to seal the additional DCR and<\/p>\n
tickets to conduct the show. It is submitted by the plaintiff that by Ext.P3<\/p>\n
letter dated 29.6.1996, the Panchayat rejected renewal of licence based on<\/p>\n
the same allegations which the trial court already found against them in the<\/p>\n
order in I.A. No.1498 of 1996.         In support of her case, the plaintiff<\/p>\n
examined PW.1 and marked Exts.P1 to P4(a).              The defendants were<\/p>\n
examined as RWs.1 and 2. No documents were produced on their side.<\/p>\n
The first defendant as RW.1 admitted that he had got information<\/p>\n
regarding the order passed in I.A. No.1498 of 1996. It is the case of the<\/p>\n
plaintiff that on the strength of the order dated 22.6.1996 she had<\/p>\n
approached the defendants for conducting the show, but they refused to<\/p>\n
put seal in the tickets and DCR which is a pre requisite for conducting the<\/p>\n
show. It is her further case that since her written requests were turned<\/p>\n
down, she sent a request through registered post, but the defendants denied<\/p>\n
having received the same. The first defendant as RW.1 admitted that he<\/p>\n
was in court on 19.6.1996 and was aware of the fact that the case was<\/p>\n
posted to 22.6.1996. He also admitted that he had read the application,<\/p>\n
I.A. No.1498 of 1996, and had got information regarding the order passed<\/p>\n
C.R.P. NO.669\/2004                      3<\/span><\/p>\n
in the said application.\n<\/p>\n
\n
       4.     The    learned    Munsiff     rightly found     that  the    first<\/p>\n
defendant\/Secretary was aware of the order passed in I.A. No.1498 of<\/p>\n
1996 on the same day on which it was passed. It is an admitted fact that<\/p>\n
without sealing the tickets and DCR, the licensee cannot run the theatre.<\/p>\n
The first defendant did not permit the plaintiff to conduct the show on<\/p>\n
22.6.1996 and thereafter. He also issued Ext.P3 letter to the plaintiff<\/p>\n
rejecting the request of the plaintiff for renewal of the licence for the same<\/p>\n
reasons which were considered and found against the defendants by the<\/p>\n
trial court. The trial court concluded that the Panchayat fully knowing the<\/p>\n
contents of the injunction application and the order passed by the court in<\/p>\n
the said application intentionally violated the order and that their conduct<\/p>\n
lead to the closure of the theatre.\n<\/p>\n
\n
       5. The President of the Panchayat who was examined as RW.2<\/p>\n
failed to give satisfactory reasons for not complying with the order passed<\/p>\n
by the court in I.A. No.1498 of 1996.               The acts of the first<\/p>\n
defendant\/Secretary evidently show that he disobeyed the order of the<\/p>\n
court. RW.2 had categorically admitted that the contents of the order was<\/p>\n
conveyed     to him and to the first defendant by their counsel on the<\/p>\n
C.R.P. NO.669\/2004                    4<\/span><\/p>\n
following day, that is, on 23.6.1996. The       trial court also held that<\/p>\n
disobedience of the order is an obstruction to the administration of justice<\/p>\n
and amounts to contempt of court. The trial court thus ordered detention<\/p>\n
of the defendants in civil prison for a period of three months under Order<\/p>\n
XXXIX Rule 2A C.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
\n
       6.  The respondents\/defendants challenged the order before the<\/p>\n
appellate court and as per judgment in C.M.A. No.27 of 1998, the<\/p>\n
appellate court allowed the appeal and set aside the order in I.A. No.1749<\/p>\n
of 1996. According to the plaintiff, the lower appellate court did not go<\/p>\n
into the merits of the contention raised by her that the order of the trial<\/p>\n
court was violated. The appellate court relied on the final judgment of this<\/p>\n
Court in Writ Appeal No.2498 of 2002 produced as Ext.B38 which<\/p>\n
confirmed the order of the learned Single Judge in O.P. No.4482 of 1998<\/p>\n
to the effect that there was enough material to justify the action of the<\/p>\n
Panchayat    in cancelling the licence of the plaintiff with effect from<\/p>\n
11.6.1996 though the period of original permit           granted was upto<\/p>\n
30.6.1996.   The lower appellate court also found that there was no<\/p>\n
direction in I.A.No.1498 of 1996 to renew the permit and that without<\/p>\n
renewing the permit, the plaintiff is not entitled to conduct the cinema<\/p>\n
theatre.\n<\/p>\n
C.R.P. NO.669\/2004                    5<\/span><\/p>\n
       7. The trial court relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court<\/p>\n
reported in Tayabbhai M. Bagasarwalla v. Hind Rubber Industries<\/p>\n
Pvt. Ltd<\/a>., A.I.R. 1997 S.C. 1240 wherein it is held that persons who<\/p>\n
disobey an order of interim injunction passed by a civil court under Order<\/p>\n
XXXIX Rule 2A C.P.C. is liable to be punished even if it is found<\/p>\n
ultimately that the civil court has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the<\/p>\n
suit. The view taken by the Supreme Court was followed by this Court in<\/p>\n
the decisions reported in Cheruvannoor Nallalam Grama Panchayat v.<\/p>\n
Ravi<\/a>, 2006(1) K.L.T. 546 and Aravindaksha Menon v. Raghava<\/p>\n
Menon<\/a>, 2007(2) K.L.T. 427.\n<\/p>\n
\n
       8. As rightly found by the courts below, the plaintiff had the licence<\/p>\n
to run the theatre at the time of the order dated 22.6.1996 and the licence<\/p>\n
expired only on 30.6.1996. This Court is called upon to decide whether<\/p>\n
there was wilful violation of the order dated 22.6.1996 in I.A. No.1498 of<\/p>\n
1996. If the first defendant\/Secretary had complied with the order of the<\/p>\n
learned Munsiff, certainly the plaintiff could have run the theatre till<\/p>\n
30.6.1996. It is true that this Court by judgment in O.P. No.4482 of 1998<\/p>\n
as confirmed by the judgment in Writ Appeal No.2498 of 2002 justified<\/p>\n
the action of the Panchayat in cancelling the licence with effect from<\/p>\n
C.R.P. NO.669\/2004                      6<\/span><\/p>\n
11.6.1996.     Going by the decisions rendered by this Court in the above<\/p>\n
Original Petition and Writ Appeal, it is clear that the plaintiff could run the<\/p>\n
theatre till 30.6.1996 pursuant to the order dated 22.6.1996 in which there<\/p>\n
was a specific direction issued to the respondents not to implement the<\/p>\n
order of cancellation of the licence. So, the finding of the appellate court<\/p>\n
that without renewing the permit, the plaintiff is not entitled to conduct the<\/p>\n
cinema theatre and therefore, it cannot be said that the defendants have<\/p>\n
wilfully violated the order in I.A. No.1498 of 1996 is not justified in the<\/p>\n
facts and circumstances of the case.        The reversal of the order of the<\/p>\n
learned Munsiff and the reasons stated by the appellate court are faulty and<\/p>\n
liable to be interfered with. The materials on record undoubtedly show<\/p>\n
that the Panchayat disobeyed the order of the civil court and thereby<\/p>\n
committed contempt of court.           Therefore, I am of the view that<\/p>\n
disobedience of order has caused obstruction in the administration of<\/p>\n
justice which amounts of contempt of court. In the circumstances, the<\/p>\n
finding of the trial court that the action of the Secretary of the Panchayat<\/p>\n
amounts to contempt of court is unassailable. The judgment under appeal<\/p>\n
is, therefore, set aside and the finding of the trial court is restored with the<\/p>\n
modification as stated below.\n<\/p>\n
\n
       9. The trial court ordered detention of the defendants\/respondents in<\/p>\n
C.R.P. NO.669\/2004                    7<\/span><\/p>\n
civil prison for three months. On the question of sentence, the learned<\/p>\n
senior counsel appearing for the respondents requested this Court to<\/p>\n
consider the matter sympathetically. I fail to understand why the second<\/p>\n
defendant\/President of the Panchayat was also proceeded against. Learned<\/p>\n
senior counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that interest of<\/p>\n
justice will be met with if the sentence is confined to the first<\/p>\n
defendant\/Secretary alone.   In the facts and circumstances of the case, I<\/p>\n
also feel that the proceedings against the second defendant\/President can<\/p>\n
be dropped. I, therefore, order that the act of disobedience committed by<\/p>\n
the Panchayat shall be dealt with only by proceeding against the Secretary<\/p>\n
of the Panchayat. Hence, taking a lenient view, this Court is of the opinion<\/p>\n
that reduction of the imprisonment against the first defendant from three<\/p>\n
months to court hours for two days and a fine of Rs.10,000\/- will meet the<\/p>\n
ends of justice.\n<\/p>\n
\n
       10.    The Special Grade Secretary      of Puduppariyaram Grama<\/p>\n
Panchayat, Palakkad Taluk as on 22.6.1996 is directed to appear before<\/p>\n
the Additional Munsiff’s Court, Palakkad on 8.7.2008 and 9.7.2008 and<\/p>\n
report to the learned Munsiff before 11 a.m. with a copy of this order.<\/p>\n
The present Secretary shall inform him about the order directly and by<\/p>\n
registered post. He shall remain in the court hall on 8.7.2008 and 9.7.2008<\/p>\n
C.R.P. NO.669\/2004                     8<\/span><\/p>\n
till the rising of the court. He shall also pay a fine of Rs.10,000\/- to the<\/p>\n
legal heir of the deceased plaintiff who was impleaded as additional<\/p>\n
second revision petitioner on or before 8.7.2008. The order of the learned<\/p>\n
Munsiff shall stand modified to the above extent.\n<\/p>\n
\n
       The Civil Revision Petition is allowed as above. There will be no<\/p>\n
order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
                                  (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE)<\/p>\n
sp\/<\/p>\n
C.R.P. NO.669\/2004    9<\/span><\/p>\n
                         HAURN-UL-RASHID, J.\n<\/p>\n
\n
                         C.R.P. NO. 669\/2004<\/p>\n
                             O R D E R<\/p>\n
                         20th June, 2008.\n<\/p>\n
C.R.P. NO.669\/2004    10<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Dhanabhagyam Ammal vs The Special Grade Secretary on 20 June, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM CRP.No. 669 of 2004() 1. DHANABHAGYAM AMMAL, … Petitioner Vs 1. THE SPECIAL GRADE SECRETARY … Respondent 2. THE PRESIDENT, PUDUPPARIYARAM GRAMA For Petitioner :SRI.P.N.KRISHNANKUTTY ACHAN(SR.) For Respondent :SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH The Hon’ble MR. Justice […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-257097","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nDhanabhagyam Ammal vs The Special Grade Secretary on 20 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dhanabhagyam Ammal vs The Special Grade Secretary on 20 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-06-19T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-10-10T10:05:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Dhanabhagyam Ammal vs The Special Grade Secretary on 20 June, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-10-10T10:05:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1679,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008\",\"name\":\"Dhanabhagyam Ammal vs The Special Grade Secretary on 20 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-10-10T10:05:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dhanabhagyam Ammal vs The Special Grade Secretary on 20 June, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Dhanabhagyam Ammal vs The Special Grade Secretary on 20 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dhanabhagyam Ammal vs The Special Grade Secretary on 20 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-06-19T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-10-10T10:05:27+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Dhanabhagyam Ammal vs The Special Grade Secretary on 20 June, 2008","datePublished":"2008-06-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-10-10T10:05:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008"},"wordCount":1679,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008","name":"Dhanabhagyam Ammal vs The Special Grade Secretary on 20 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-06-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-10-10T10:05:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanabhagyam-ammal-vs-the-special-grade-secretary-on-20-june-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dhanabhagyam Ammal vs The Special Grade Secretary on 20 June, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/257097","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=257097"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/257097\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=257097"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=257097"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=257097"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}